Culture: Movie: Making
Have you seen 'The Second' yet?   (+34, -2)  [vote for, against]
A Warhol-type movie in slow time

Photron (see link) makes a camera that shoots an amazing 109,500 frames per second. That is, in just one second, it can shoot enough frames for a 76-minute film.

Now, 76 minutes of a man on the street in mid-sneeze is interesting only for the first 2 minutes. After that? Boring! (A la Warhol's Empire State...)

Mount your camera on a long, sturdy line that stretches a long, long way down a busy street and add a rail-gun-like mechanism to keep the camera moving at a scary rate for the 1 second.

Now you get a graceful 'matrix'-like tracking shot of people people on the street, caught in mid-life.

The interesting thing is that you see all these people pass you by over 76 minutes -- eating, laughing, talking, driving, yelling, crying -- but only 1 second of city life has passed in the film.

Maybe it is just me, but I'd pay to see this movie.

Then again, I liked Baraka.
-- not_only_but_also, Jan 27 2005

1000fps to 109,500 fps
It does 1000fps in high-res and up to 109,500 in low res [not_only_but_also, Jan 27 2005]

[not_only_but_also, Jan 27 2005]

An 8 hour movie of the Empire State Building [not_only_but_also, Jan 27 2005]

HB: "Cheap Slow Motion Camera" cheap_20Slow_20motion_20cam
The Photron has come up before here. [bristolz, Jan 27 2005]

(?) High speed cameras used to record H-bomb detonations http://www.aracnet..../wetokian/trap1.htm
oral history of the H- bomb tests [csea, Jan 27 2005]

Frozen Moment Technique http://www.digitala.../frozen_moment.html
[Worldgineer, Jan 27 2005]

The Quickening Rule _22The_20Quickening_22_20Rule
by mrkillboy. [calum, Feb 01 2005]

There are rotary mirror cameras that operate in the millions of frames per second. Up to 5,000,000 fps. Nuclear weapons research drove the development.

Oh, and they shoot on film.
-- bristolz, Jan 27 2005

Wow, [bris] that is cool. Now I can re-name the film 'The Instant'!

Would the mirror-camera fit on my rail-gun-wire?
-- not_only_but_also, Jan 27 2005

I don't know. Will a Toyota Sienna fit on your railgun wire? That's roughly the size of the rotary mirror cameras.
-- bristolz, Jan 27 2005

Serendipity / synchronicity, I happened to be reading up today on the history of a family friend who was involved in the A- and H-bomb development.

Back in 1956, they had cameras capable of a million frames / sec. see [link]
-- csea, Jan 27 2005

I think the cable weight would lead the camera to swoop downward toward the crowd.
-- proto13, Jan 27 2005

As it accelerates it would show people moving in Zeno fashion.
-- FarmerJohn, Jan 27 2005

Try mounting several thousand cheap digital cameras in a long line, and set them off electronically one after the other. It would obviously cost more than a small sum, but they could be set to go off again quite soon, and the lighting need not be special.
-- Ling, Jan 27 2005

That's sort of how they shoot effects like those in the Matrix. I'll look for a link.
-- Worldgineer, Jan 27 2005

I saw a Zen film much like this. It was twenty minutes long and was just an extreme close up of a popcorn popping in some oil. You couldn't really tell what it was until ten minutes in.
-- wagster, Jan 27 2005

I see room for a sequel - How about "the Second Second"
-- Flux, Feb 01 2005

I never even saw the first yet. (+)
-- 2 fries shy of a happy meal, Feb 01 2005

This is one of the best ideas I've seen in a while... Or perhaps it just appeals to me in all the right ways...

-- photojunkie, Feb 01 2005

I really think shooting (har) the camera across the street at a scary speed using the railgun is part of what makes this idea appealing.
-- ywong, Feb 01 2005

//Photron (see link) makes a camera that shoots an amazing 109,500 frames per second.// I'd be very, very surprised. Shoots at a rate of 109,500 frames per second, more likely.
-- AbsintheWithoutLeave, Feb 01 2005

-- bristolz, Feb 01 2005

[bris]: the anno is meaning "109,500 individually amazing frames"
as opposed to ...
an amazing fact (109,500 frames per second)
-- Jinbish, Feb 01 2005

Um, okaaay.
-- bristolz, Feb 01 2005

More likely an amazing 109,500 boring frames per second.
-- Ling, Feb 01 2005

Sorry [bris], was what I meant to say was "it'll shoot, say, a hundred frames in 100/109500 of a second", but I'd be astonished it could complete a second's worth of shooting at that rate, without some seriously wide memory.
-- AbsintheWithoutLeave, Feb 01 2005

I read it the same way that [Jinbish] did.
-- brodie, Feb 01 2005

How about if this second were the second second, starting a fraction of a second after the first second, which would be a 2,000,000 fps shot from an inverted rocket sled. The first second would look as described here, and the second second would show the same people just after a mach 8 flyby, with their lunch suspended in mid air, etc.

(No, I didn’t do the math)
-- Shz, Feb 01 2005

[Feignman] the camera is moving, and therefore the picture as well. Unless by picture you mean a mural several miles long, in which case the only advantage here is the chair.
-- tiromancer, Feb 01 2005

//Unless by picture you mean a mural several miles long// That's exactly what this would be. Since the camera is moving //at a scary rate//, and with the high rate of camera operation, you could just take a mural as long as your //rail-gun-like mechanism//, and pan along it for an hour and get the same effect.
-- brodie, Feb 02 2005

random, halfbakery